High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4789/2016disposed off

Smt. Anusuiya Nagarchi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-09-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4789 of 2016 Smt. Anusuiya Nagarchi S/o Shri B. R. Nagarchi, Aged About 43 Years Occupation Assistant Teacher Panchayat, Primary School, Temari, R/o Village Temari, Block Dharsiwan, Tah. Raipur, Thana Mana, Revenue & Civil District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Gramin Vikas Vibhag, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. Director, Panchayat, Sanchanalaya Chhattisgarh, Indrawatibhawan, Naya Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Dharsiwan, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

5. Collector, Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

6. District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

7. Block Education Officer, Dharsiwan, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate For State :

Shri Bhaskar Payashi Panel Lawyer S.B.:

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 15/09/2016 Heard on admission.

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner is working as Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) since 1998, neither

-2she has been given kramonnati nor Samayman Vetanman (time bound pay scale) and, therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to file representation before the competent authority for redressal of her grievances. To this, counsel for the State has no objection.

2. Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. In the eventuality of making any representation by the petitioner highlighting her grievances, the same is expected to be decided by the authority concerned expeditiously in accordance with law.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation in accordance with law.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen